title: An open, prospective, randomized pilot investigation evaluating pain with the use of a soft silicone wound contact layer vs bridal veil and staples on split thickness skin grafts as a primary dressing.
abstract: An open, prospective, randomized, pilot investigation was implemented to evaluate the pain, cost-effectiveness, ease of use, tolerance, efficacy, and safety of a soft silicone wound contact layer (Mepitel One) vs Bridal Veil and staples used on split thickness skin grafts in the treatment of deep partial or full-thickness thermal burns. Individuals aged between 18 and 70 years with deep partial or full-thickness thermal burns (1-25% TBSA) were randomized into two groups and treated for 14 days or until greater than 95% graft take was achieved, whichever occurred first. Data were obtained and analyzed on pain experienced before, during, and after dressing removal. Secondary considerations included the overall cost (direct), graft take and healing, the ease of product use, overall experience of the dressing, and adverse events. A total of 43 subjects were recruited. There were no significant differences in burn area profiles within the groups. The pain level during dressing removal was significant between the groups (P = .0118) with the removal of Mepitel One being less painful. The staff costs were lower in the group of patients treated with Mepitel One (P = .0064) as reflected in the shorter time required for dressing removal (P = .0005), with Mepitel One taking on average less than a quarter of the time to remove. There was no significant difference in healing between the two groups, with 99.0% of the Mepitel One group and 93.1% of the Bridal Veil and staples group showing greater than 95% graft take at post-op day 7 (+/-1) (P = .2373). Clinicians reported that the soft silicone dressing was easier to use, more conformable, and demonstrated better ability to stay in place, compared with the Bridal Veil and staples regime. Both treatments were well tolerated, with no serious adverse events in either treatment group. Mepitel One was at least as effective in the treatment of patients as the standard care (Bridal Veil and staples). In addition, the group of patients treated with the soft silicone dressing demonstrated decreased pain and lower costs associated with treatment.
authors.affiliation: From the *Nathan Speare Regional Burn Treatment Center, Crozer-Chester Medical Center, Upland, Pennsylvania; †Joseph M. Still Burn Center, Joseph M. Still Research Foundation, Inc., Augusta, Georgia; ‡Tampa General Hospital Burn Center, University Foundation for Education & Research, Inc., Florida Gulf-to-Bay Anesthesiology, Tampa, Florida; and §University of Kansas Hospital Trauma and Burn Center, Kansas City, Kansas.
authors.forename: Mary Lou
authors.initials: ML
authors.lastname: Patton
authors.forename: Robert Fred
authors.initials: RF
authors.lastname: Mullins
authors.forename: David
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Smith
authors.forename: Richard
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Korentager
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D002056:Burns / Q000628:therapy*; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009779:Occlusive Dressings; D010147:Pain Measurement; D010865:Pilot Projects; D011446:Prospective Studies; D012828:Silicones / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D016038:Skin Transplantation; D017792:Surgical Stapling; D016896:Treatment Outcome
chemical_list: D012828:Silicones; C114834:mepitel